• derpgon@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Oh it is a democracy, but not “direct democracy”. We don’t choose what happens, we just choose who decides what happens.

    Those in power bribe, threaten, and lie, and we can’t do shit about it because the actual hood guys end due to harassment or threats and can’t deal with it psychologically.

    • finestnothing@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Oh it is a democracy, but not “direct democracy”. We don’t choose what happens, we just choose who decides what happens.

      Still not a democracy, you just described a Republic, which is what we’ve always officially been even if die hard patriots prefer to say democracy

      Those in power bribe, threaten, and lie, and we can’t do shit about it because the actual hood guys end due to harassment or threats and can’t deal with it psychologically.

      Plutocracy in action

      • phoenixz@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        A democracy where people vote directly on each issue isn’t practical and would likely backfire. You want to vote for people to temporarily represent you.

        Having said that, the way the US does democracy and has been doing it for, say, the last century, is beyond my comprehension and just plain retarded. Especially since Reagan already, the elections are more about show than content, and all presidents since Reagan (that devil included) have been … Well, just dumb showmen, Obama excluded, perhaps.

      • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        I think more than a few “patriots” feel the need to point out that we’re a republic, not a democracy.

        “Democracy isn’t the objective; liberty, peace, and prosperity are. We want the human condition to flourish. Rank democracy can thwart that.”

        Because the idea that people should get a say is ridiculous.

        It’s figuring out how to maintain dominance with a minority of support. And so, in that sense, I think the rhetoric is really telling. It’s a way of rationalizing the further entrenchment of minority rule.

        “Too much democracy” interferes with their plans.

      • derpgon@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Either way, society is fucked until we got nothing left but to revolt - but that will never happen, as the carrot is being dangled all the time.

      • TheKingBombOmbKiller@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Oh it is a democracy, but not “direct democracy”. We don’t choose what happens, we just choose who decides what happens.

        Still not a democracy, you just described a Republic, which is what we’ve always officially been even if die hard patriots prefer to say democracy

        What are you talking about? The people electing representatives that makes the final decisions is called “representative democracy”. A republic is a form of representative democracy. A constitutional monarchy, like you find a lot of in Europe, is another form of representative democracy that fit the original description, without being republics.

      • sparkle@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        Cymraeg
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        It’s a Republican Democracy… a Democratic Federal Republic… whatever you want to call it, point is it’s both a Republic and a Democracy. They’re not mutually exclusive categories. In fact, most categories you can use to describe the structure/type of a government aren’t very exclusive categories. Governments are very complex and can be a lot of different things, so we have a lot of different terms (and different usages of those terms) to narrow a description down.